Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ruleslawyer" data-source="post: 1578299" data-attributes="member: 1757">No, but they make a good summation.Er, no. I just put the SR thing on the board because, at these levels, when practically everything you face has the ability or access to it, SR is an important factor.Yes, but the fact remains that they HAD the high-level spells to begin with, which the MT does not. Keep in mind that those spells represent the top of the list for MTs. And harm and disintegrate use SR as their principal defense; again, the MT can't beat it. Moreover, I wouldn't trust an MT to deliver a harm spell, since he's unlikely to have the melee survivability of the cleric; that survivability (and/or the divine reach ability of the hierophant class, which the straight cleric gets much earlier) are essential to delivering harm without getting smushed like a bedbug.The ever-popular Travel domain does have teleport, you know. And does mass haste even exist in a 3.5 campaign? The MT is a 3.5 PrC, after all. You have to keep that in mind.  I repeat. Give me an example of why. Concrete examples of this happening in your campaign would be a really good idea, since I don't see the evidence for this at all. Moreover, the above contention really damages your argument. If anything, the MT's ability to cast lots of lower-level spells that aren't good in direct offensive capacity make them excellent support characters, not spotlight hogs. Strawman. I didn't at all suggest that, which is why I wanted to see if you had actual experience from which to report. Moreover, "high endurance" is irrelevant when you're at levels at which people have full access to greater teleport. NO one runs through all their spells at a rate which would give the MT an advantage simply because he had a few extra low-level spell slots. Casters in danger of this teleport home and rest.If you have a party of three characters, one of whom is a fighter-type, one a skill monkey, and one an MT, then yes, the MT will look good. But that is because he is the only spellcaster. A party of a fighter, cleric (or wizard), rogue, and MT, for example, will find the MT used as a glorified healing/buffing item, possibly doling out some buff spells like haste and the ability boosters, but being able to cast a few extra 3rd-level spells at 16th level hardly gives a PC the spotlight. If your argument is that the MT makes the PARTY too powerful by providing overly cheap curing and buffing, I can sorta accept that, although I'd argue that the changes to the ability buffs and (greater) invisibility make the MT either a necessary adjunct to a party that equips according to 3.0 rather than 3.5 principles, or just sorta weak.But now I've taken this thread off-topic, for which I apologize to all posters, including yourself, Psion.</blockquote>

Verification